The end of running water from the tap, food in the supermarket, radiator heating, the end of the Internet, cars, hospitals — “ the life of man is then solitary, needy, painful, almost animal, and brief “. But the collapse won’t have to be such a horrible thing.
If we take environmental issues seriously, we have known – for quite a long time now – that the world is on an unsustainable trajectory. We will experience radical, and probably unpleasant, transformations in our way of life in our lifetime. How everything can collapse offers a summary of scientific knowledge on (mainly) climate and energy which will not bring any particular revelation to people interested in the subject, but the first part of which constitutes a good general public summary. Written to be easy to access and readable by as many people as possible, the book by Pablo Servigne and Raphaël Stevens cites a large corpus of scientific articles and works in English, and the bibliography is excellent.
The question, of course, is what will happen when the climate changes, oil runs out, etc.? As we talk about the future, we know that the talk we have about what can, will or must happen has an effect on what will really happen. Everything that concerns the anticipation of the future calls for the greatest modesty, and predictions of the end of the world – there have been a certain number of them for some time – do not rank among the most modest predictions. The minimally responsible approach consists of imagining all possible solutions to escape a catastrophic future. The idea is to imagine a harmonious transition to a future where the climate has not changed too much, and where humans consume resources in a thoughtful and balanced way. The key issue here is knowing how much time we have to accommodate the transition. For example, Naomi Klein’s entire book is based on the idea that we must act now, because it will be too late in ten or fifteen years: the change will be catastrophic. But in reality, no one knows how much time we have before, given the constant situation, dramatic crises occur, not to mention the fact that not all countries will be affected in the same way and at the same time. And if there is the slightest chance that humans can organize themselves to invent lifestyles that are both pleasant and sustainable, the least ethical responsibility is to focus all our energy towards this goal.
Servigne and Stevens take the complete opposite view of this argument. According to them, it is already too late to change the planetary processes unleashed by the massive consumption of oil and coal. ; the temperature will in any case rise sharply. Humans have crossed too many limits in the exploitation and destruction of their environment for us to adjust the trajectory. We are heading straight towards collapse, so we might as well forget about constructive solutions and start thinking about collapse straight away. Their fundamental hypothesis is that there are too many different and extremely serious crises brewing at the moment for humans to be able to calmly organize a harmonious transition. The transition will be painful: it will be collapse.
We can read How everything can collapse in two ways: as a reflection on a possible scenario, or as a prediction of a near and inevitable future. As far as it is possible to judge, the authors seem to me to be predicting an inevitable future, where contemporary societies collapse under the conjunction of energy, climate and economic crises. It’s possible, certainly probable, but it’s not certain. We can discuss point by point the elements put forward, the solutions which are not mentioned, the initiatives, we can even play a little philosophical game on the indeterminacy of the future, but it is more constructive to read the book as a reflection on a possible scenario, which makes it possible to rule out a whole set of detailed objections, but which are important when the issue is the end of the world.
In fact, where the book is really at fault is in its poor discussion of the forms that collapse would take. After all, many civilizations have collapsed, notably due to climate change or overexploitation of the environment. The authors made the somewhat strange choice of instead seeking to develop a form of pre-collapse wisdom. How everything can collapse tries to imagine an alternative to technological blindness and survivalist catastrophism. When we say the words “ collapse ” And “ end of civilization », they write, we too often think of post-apocalyptic cultural works (Mad Maxzombie films, The roadetc.) where humans are reduced to cannibalism and the war of all against all. This is the meaning of the survivalist movement, whose members prepare both for survival as hunter-gatherers and for self-defense. For Servigne and Stevens, the collapse is the opportunity for a rebirth, an exit from a way of life which was in any case condemned and reprehensible. This somewhat mystical statement will put off many readers. The book indeed tries to talk about the fact, but also about the psychology of the fact: the depression that awareness creates, the companions annoyed by apocalyptic conversations, the skeptics who ridicule the authors, etc.
The book is nonetheless of interest. The economy and population grow exponentially, but most resources on Earth are finite, whether stocks (oil, metals, minerals, etc.) or flows (fresh water , forests, fish in the oceans, etc.). Oil is the most important resource for modern civilization, and we are reaching the point where the energy required to extract the resources exceeds the energy collected (this is the problem with shale gas). Peak oil means that oil will eventually become expensive. As our entire civilization relies on abundant and cheap energy (for food production, supplying supermarkets and heating), this means at a minimum that we are all going to be poorer, and certainly more unequal. As the authors show, there is nothing to expect from nuclear power and renewable energies, which are based on complex technologies requiring significant quantities of oil and materials themselves in finite quantities. And since oil extraction relies on massive investments, the oil crisis can be expected to lead to a major financial crisis. In any case, write the authors, between global warming (+4°C over the entire globe, this means +8 -10°C on the continents), the decline of biodiversity (the sixth extinction), the acidification of the oceans and the disappearance of fish, chemical pollution and many othershumanity cannot escape a combination of crises of different natures which should precipitate the collapse of our civilization.
Most people think that science and technology will solve all problems. This is unlikely, according to Servigne and Stevens, given the laws of physics and biology. There is no renewable energy source that can replace oil. Another category of people believes that humans can escape collapse through mobilization for sustainable environmental, social and economic policies. One of the most interesting points of How everything can collapse is that the authors do not believe for a second that this is possible. We have known for almost forty years that the current dynamic is unsustainable and deadly ; and for forty years, humans have collectively and knowingly decided to continue getting worse. For example, if we take the scenarios of the Meadows report for the Club of Rome, we are currently following the curve of the most pessimistic scenario. Another example: when we look at the forecasts of the reports of the IPCCthe situation is each time worse than what was predicted in the previous report. In other words, add the authors, the reports of the IPCC are too optimistic. The fact is that the vast majority of humans aspire to a way of life that destroys the planet. You only have to see with what vehemence attempts to pursue environmental policies are fought, obviously fought by financial and industrial interests, but also by good people who live too poor to be able to hear a speech that promises them even more. of poverty.
How everything can collapse is not free of slag. When the authors leave the materialist problem of energy, climate and nature to venture towards psychology or the social sciences, they do so in a somewhat naive and intuitive way, and the book then loses density. Chapter 10, which brings together contributions from demography, political science, psychology and sociology, is the least accomplished in the book. The passage where the authors hypothesize that humans do not try “ innovative political systems » by cognitive conformism will make researchers in social and political sciences smile. But who are the naive ? Servigne and Stevens seek to describe the fundamental dynamics of contemporary societies, while most sociologists, political scientists and economists prefer to assiduously ignore anything that could disturb their intellectual comfort. In the last part of the book, the authors quote David Holmgren, the creator of the concept of permaculture, who today says he wants a rapid and radical collapse, so as to save what can still be saved from the planet. We sense in them a form of sympathy for this solution. Perhaps the book’s greatest merit is to suggest to us that this idea is not completely absurd.